340 réponses à ce sujet

[txgoldrush]

Heather Cline wrote...

txgoldrush wrote...

Seriously, all three games in the series were rushed to meet deadlines...but ME1 for the 360 was the worst.

Yes, the ending and some elements in ME3 might have been rushed out the door, however almost every element was rushed out the door for ME1. Only DA2 is more rushed and unpolished than ME1...

Horrendous texture pop in, cut and paste environments, bugs galore, horrendous combat mechanics, horrendous gameplay balance, backwards difficulty curve, poorly thoughout inventory....

Plain and simple, MICROSOFT, not EA, rushed the game out the door to meet the holiday season for their 360 exclusive. But since its not EA that did it, its not convienant to criticize. Fact is Microsoft is worse than EA at rushing games....name a Fable game thats not unfinished and unpolished.

Really, ME3 is one of Bioware's MOST polished games. Its also better than ME1 in almost every single way...ME3 doesn't treat the characters like talking codex entries like ME1, ME3 has more organic writing than ME1 unlike the first games robotic like script at many points, ME3 has better combat than both ME1 and ME2, ME3 has a better paced plotline than ME1 and definitely ME2...the only thing ME1 has an advantage is the ending...thats it.

Take of the nostalgia glasses people.....

I have to refute this post on several things.

First of all ME1's texture popping was programmed in for the first game. They were working with new technology of the 360 so the texture popping issue was apart of the game. The PC version of the game did not have that but the PC version came out nearly a year later after the 360 launch and had a different system.

The combat system was programmed to be that way it wasn't horrible it wasn't meant to be the combat system that ME2 or ME3 had. In fact the only reason why ME2 and ME3 has the combat system the way it is now is because a bunch of third person shooter and first person shooter fanboys whined that the combat sucked in ME1 and this is why we got the stripped down version of the RPG mechanics in ME2 and ME3 due to people wanting it to be less rpg and more third person shooter.

The cut and paste environments? Where? Each planet was different and had different sky's different terrain. In fact the only things that had the similar environments were side missions and that was explained as prefabricated shelters so they were all the same.

The inventory system was not poorly thought out. Mass Effect was supposed to be an RPG first a shooter second. However due to the fact that whiny fanboys of other genre's got their way the ME team took a more shooter route and less rpg route for the second game and 3rd game. They only added back in more RPG elements because we the rpg crowd got pissed off that the third person shooter part of the fan base got their way almost entirely.

There are not that many bugs in ME1. In fact there was only one patch in the entire history of ME1 ever made. That says something about the quality of ME1. ME2 and ME3 have more bugs than ME1 ever had.

Fact is you are trying to destroy the first game because you think the other two games are better. When many of us don't like how ME2 or 3 was put together.

Have a nice day.

Ultima IX was the first 3d game in the series, they were working on new tech, but that doesn't EXCUSE THEM FROM THE PROBLEMS IT HAD with the engine. So what Bioware was using new tech, lets find excuses for flaws. Its hypocritical, you excuse one game for flaws and rat on another.

Guess what, most peopel didn't like the combat of the first game...Why? Because it tried to be both an RPG and a shooter, and did neither well. No matter, it was also unbalanced...Bastion Stasis..I WIN....Immunity...I WIN....Singularity...I WIN. Bioware did not think of game balance at all when they released the game. And why the helldo I have to startegy far more in ME2 and ME3 than ME1 despite less RPG elements...maybe because its more balanced.

And I wonder why Alpha Protocol was critically and commericially panned....maybe because they REPEATED THE SAME MISTAKES.

An inventory that is full of trash items, that forces these trash items into inventory, that has a invisible limit, and that all the gear is useless after ytou pick up the ebst gear too early IS POORLY THOUGHT OUT. How about this...how would a three man commando team carry 100 different weapons and suits of armor....That alone is idiotic.

Woopdie doo...there are different skies, doesn't take away from the fact that the environment is poorly done and that the planets are lifeless. Excuses, excuses.

Just because there was one patch doesn't mean it isn't buggy. Hell they gave up on alot of them. They didn't fix the balance problems like say.....Dark Souls. Hell Skyrim is addressing balance problems, so did DA2.

Face it, you are in the minority...ME1 is looked at as the WORST in the series overall....accept this fact.

[Tehzim]

You have to remember that ME was pretty unique when it originally appeared. It used the licensed Unreal 3 engine (and many of the graphical issues came from that like texture pop-in).

The original combat was an interesting hybrid of 3rd person shooter and the stop and go gameplay of older BioWare games like KotOR. And its roughness is very much colored by our experiences of the later games, but you'd be looking at it in the wrong direction. Each is an improvement graphically and mechanically. Story is debatable.

[Grimez7]

ME1 is the second best in the series right after 3, love the story but it could use some better side missions.

Edit: So could 3, definitely 3

Modifié par Grimez7, 01 avril 2012 - 02:29 .

[txgoldrush]

iamthedave3 wrote...

Acidrain92 wrote...

Lavits75 wrote...

So what of ME2? ME3 isn't where talking codex stopped. That was ME2. For example, if Mordin is leading the second team in the suicide mission, he dies and says "Tell them... I held the line."

This is a distinct step in his character development. It refers to his time at STG under Captain Kirrahe. See, ME2 managed to do that through plot. But how do you find out he was STG in ME3? Talking codex. It gets brought up in dialogue, just kind of thrown in there with no real purpose. ME3 didn't develop characters. ME1 and two did. ME1 and ME2 built relationships for ME3. ME1 and ME2 got you empotionally attached.

so I guess we arent considering it character development when Mordin decides to cure the Genophage because he realized "I MADE A MISTAKE"? Or how Tali has finally accepted Legion as a friend? Or how Tali and Garrus decided that they wanted to be together? Or how Wrex has become a leader of his people, really stepping it up from ME2, trying to KILL YOU if you stop the genophage cure?

also relationships and character development walk hand in hand

but whatever, I see how it is. Whatever it takes to satisfy your skewed point of view.

Both of those things are set up in ME 2. Very clearly. They're meaningless statements without ME 2 and the character development that occurs for Mordin and in the clash between Tali and Legion that occurs in that game.

But you know, go on and pretend the second game didn't do most of ME 3's work for it.

There is very little character development in ME 3. There are character moments, but they are all based on prior characterization.

ME2 has far better character development than ME1....However, Liara develops in ME3, so does James, so does Javik, Steve Cortez, yep...far better than the first two games. Even Joker develops further as a character, who finally shows his haunted side.

[xsdob]

Militarized wrote...

Wrong, they spent a long time working on ME1.

The largest amount of work was they spent an entire year.. A YEAR or maybe even more sitting in an office every day conceptualizing Mass Effect... writing out what the galaxy was going to be like.

That is the opposite of rushed. Now obviously they had to meet deadlines but ME1 fit it's genre perfectly. No company will ever have unlimited time but Microsoft sure as hell did give them a lot of time and it was ana amazing game for the time it came out in. It's still a great game. 

And yet it still wasn't enough to stop items from not equiping unless you spam the equip button and facial and outfit textures taking 5 seconds to load each layer.

And fable games do infact suck.

[Heather Cline]

You know what goldrush these are all your personal opinions. Telling me I'm in the minority with out any way to back up your claim is making you look like a raging child.

I've calmly, collectively refuted your argument on each note and you came back with a raging post instead of engaging me in a calm discussion.

I can go with the facts if you like. I can list facts all day long and completely destroy your post one word and sentence at a time.

However I won't do that. Why? Because I don't feel like wasting my time with someone who wants to demean every single person who loves ME1 and thinks it's the better game than ME3 because ME3 is so buggy, it was so rushed, the endings don't fit the entire trilogy and we were lied to on so many things.

ME1 is the superior game in my and many people's opinion. If you want to insult me or anyone else, go right ahead but you will be reported and you will be banned for your posts.

Good day.

[txgoldrush]

xsdob wrote...

Militarized wrote...

Wrong, they spent a long time working on ME1.

The largest amount of work was they spent an entire year.. A YEAR or maybe even more sitting in an office every day conceptualizing Mass Effect... writing out what the galaxy was going to be like.

That is the opposite of rushed. Now obviously they had to meet deadlines but ME1 fit it's genre perfectly. No company will ever have unlimited time but Microsoft sure as hell did give them a lot of time and it was ana amazing game for the time it came out in. It's still a great game. 

And yet it still wasn't enough to stop items from not equiping unless you spam the equip button and facial and outfit textures taking 5 seconds to load each layer.

And fable games do infact suck.

yep, it doesn't matter how long you work at a game...if you rush one aspect of the game, its rushed. Obviously many of its game play elements weren't tested properly.

[RedTail F22]

Rushing gameplay and mechanincs vs rushing the story. I'll take the first any day. The story is crucial to me in Mass Effect and ME1's story had a very complete feel to it imo.

[Heather Cline]

Red Tali I completely agree. The story is more important than gameplay mechanics. Yes gameplay mechanics need to work but they don't have to be the best thing out there if the story pulls everything else together.

[txgoldrush]

Heather Cline wrote...

You know what goldrush these are all your personal opinions. Telling me I'm in the minority with out any way to back up your claim is making you look like a raging child.

I've calmly, collectively refuted your argument on each note and you came back with a raging post instead of engaging me in a calm discussion.

I can go with the facts if you like. I can list facts all day long and completely destroy your post one word and sentence at a time.

However I won't do that. Why? Because I don't feel like wasting my time with someone who wants to demean every single person who loves ME1 and thinks it's the better game than ME3 because ME3 is so buggy, it was so rushed, the endings don't fit the entire trilogy and we were lied to on so many things.

ME1 is the superior game in my and many people's opinion. If you want to insult me or anyone else, go right ahead but you will be reported and you will be banned for your posts.

Good day.

And yet ME1 was worse techinically, opinions do not change facts.

but the shooter fans...bla bla bla....not RPG enough...bla bla bla

Face it, Bioware changed things up BECAUSE of the problems with ME1, from its gameplay, to how it handles characters. You do not have to like it, but that is reality.

It is YOU that ignores the flaws of the game...I am not. There are flaws to ME3, but there are many more in ME1.

[txgoldrush]

RedTail F22 wrote...

Rushing gameplay and mechanincs vs rushing the story. I'll take the first any day. The story is crucial to me in Mass Effect and ME1's story had a very complete feel to it imo.

And yet if the gameplay completely sucks, why play it?

[Bleachrude]

txgoldrush wrote...

RedTail F22 wrote...

Rushing gameplay and mechanincs vs rushing the story. I'll take the first any day. The story is crucial to me in Mass Effect and ME1's story had a very complete feel to it imo.

And yet if the gameplay completely sucks, why play it?

THIS.

I can simply read about the story after the fact. Hell, this is what I did with FO3 and Alpha Protocol...Both have cool storylines  but I personally couldn't stand the gameplay so I just youtubed a "let's play" and simply watched it instead...

In the age of youtube, there's no reason IMO to "play a game JUST for the story" since there will always be someone who has done the game already...

[MingWolf]

Oh god, this thread reminds me of the whole DA2>DA:O thread created months ago (by the same OP in fact). I also recall a systematic dismantling of the original argument.

I liked all three games in the ME series. They each had their problems. I'm replaying ME1 now, and still think it's pretty brilliant. It's a '07 game, it's old, but it was great at it's time and still has replay value today. Bioware was trying new things, so it wasn't perfect. No need to attack an older game just to defend ME3. Dividing gamers into "minorities" and "majorities" for liking different games more than others in the series is quite frankly, childish. Comparing the combat system of an older game to a newer game in claiming one is more superior than other while completely ignoring time and saying the game was rush is out of context, and is again, childish. There is no "fact" that ME1 is worst in the series, it's completely subjective.

Just accept the differences and move on.

[MrHibachi]

Didn't they spend almost three times as much time working on ME1 than ME3, or did I hear that wrong? I still think the storytelling was superior in ME1 and frankly while ME3 had its moments, most of the dialogue in ME1 was better as well (to me).

Modifié par MrHibachi, 01 avril 2012 - 03:00 .

[N7Menma]

ME1 took like 4 years to develop. I don't know how rushed that is. For the time it came out, it was incredible. I don't think they had the budget or time to come up with 30 different types of bases and bunkers. The combat was awesome. Adept + Assault Rifle training is the most fun I've ever had in Mass Effect. I think ME1 is the best in the series.

[txgoldrush]

MingWolf wrote...

Oh god, this thread reminds me of the whole DA2>DA:O thread created months ago (by the same OP in fact). I also recall a systematic dismantling of the original argument.

I liked all three games in the ME series. They each had their problems. I'm replaying ME1 now, and still think it's pretty brilliant. It's a '07 game, it's old, but it was great at it's time and still has replay value today. Bioware was trying new things, so it wasn't perfect. No need to attack an older game just to defend ME3. Dividing gamers into "minorities" and "majorities" for liking different games more than others in the series is quite frankly, childish. Comparing the combat system of an older game to a newer game in claiming one is more superior than other while completely ignoring time and saying the game was rush is out of context, and is again, childish. There is no "fact" that ME1 is worst in the series, it's completely subjective.

Just accept the differences and move on.

You might want to look at that thread again...its DA2 > DAO in regards to its characters, not the games itself. And really both are below the quality that Bioware should have.

However the combat systems can be compared because of the two radically different styles...and sometimes its possible for an older game to have a better system than a newer one in the series...compare FFV to FFVIII in how their battle systems were recieved.

And yet Bioware is trying new things for ME3 like autodialogue and its attacked, but when ME1 tried new things and didn't come out right...thats excused......that is hypocrisy.

[MrHibachi]

txgoldrush wrote...

And yet Bioware is trying new things for ME3 like autodialogue and its attacked, but when ME1 tried new things and didn't come out right...thats excused......that is hypocrisy.

I don't see that as an example of hypocrisy at all.  You relate something specific that relates directly to the kind of game it is to a broad generalization about change and trying new "things".   Plus it would only be hypocritical if it were coming from the exact same people in the first place.  I think there is a fundamental problem in games trying to switch or split genres in the midst of a pre-planned trilogy when the first two installments follow the same pattern and the third starts to split away and do something else.  Minimizing core elements of an RPG to make it more palatable to shooter/action gamers is a pretty asinine thing to do imo.

Modifié par MrHibachi, 01 avril 2012 - 03:07 .

[txgoldrush]

MrHibachi wrote...

Didn't they spend almost three times as much time working on ME1 than ME3, or did I hear that wrong? I still think the storytelling was superior in ME1 and frankly while ME3 had its moments, most of the dialogue in ME1 was better as well (to me).

No, the dialogue is quite a bit more robotic and stilted, overexplaining everything through talking codex entry type conversations, while Shep him or herself has a bunch one liners, especially Renegade. Very little natural flow. And really Renegade in the first two games was poorly written bad action hero stuff. ME3's Renegade is not only far better written, it is actually more in line with the belief system. Its not Closed Fist bad in ME1, but it shows they still have to grasp the concept.

[Heather Cline]

Ok you want facts. Fine I will list the facts for ME1 and then for ME3. Lets see how they stack up.

ME1 texture popping issues due to it being on a new system with a new version of the unreal engine.

ME3 texture popping issues due to being rushed and the game not being optimized.

ME1 Menu system belonging due to it being an RPG.

ME3 lack of menu system due to minority of fans raging about it and getting it changed while many said nothing.

ME1 items to give you choices on what to equip and use and able to use up to 3 mods per gun with higher level equipment.

ME3 lack of items and mods to use and also limiting you to 2 mods per gun.

ME1 load times are negligent and absent.

ME3 load times are horrible especially in the armor screen.

ME1 game freezing non-existent.

ME3 game freezes constantly.

ME1 graphical glitches non-existent.

ME3 graphical glitches including glowing mouths, assault rifle butt going into femsheps chest when being held, or going into garrus' armor when he holds it.

ME1 Hand texture issues non-existent

ME3 hand texture issues with NPC's and Shepard having old people hands when the characters are in their 20's and 30's

ME1 mission bugs, very few and very minor that they did not need to be patched.

ME3 mission bugs abound in this game. There are many that are posted in the ME3 tech support forums for these.

ME1 femshep walks like a woman and runs like a woman

ME3 femshep walks partly like a man and runs like a man

ME1 lighting issues... non-existent. All lighting issues were dealt with in development.

ME3 lighting issues abound in Javik's room on the normandy, on the citadel and in missions.

ME1 cutscenes where using a assault rifle is taken off the back an actual assault rifle is taken off the back.

ME3 if your shepard is not equipped with an assault rifle the character still reaches behind their back for an assault rifle but comes up with a sub machine gun.

ME1 start up sequence... when the game starts there is no black screen with white snow across it.

ME3 start up sequence... when the game starts up many times there is a black screen with white snow across it before the game starts up.

ME1 black screen start up freezing non-existent.

ME3 black screen start up freezing is constant and many people are affected by this.

ME1 dialogue not executing right non-existent

ME3 dialogue cues not executing right existent in several places.

ME1 auto-dialogue is minimal in the RPG mode and the same goes for ME2.

ME3 auto-dialogue is rampant in both Story and RPG mode.

ME1 crazy head animations non-existent

ME3 crazy head animations existent and noted in several places throughout the game.

ME1 dialogue audio cutting out non-existent.

ME3 dialogue audio cutting out is not only present it runs rampant throughout the entire game.

ME1 side quests having huge bugs where quests do not activate or cannot be completed if certain actions are taken elsewhere non-existent

ME3 side quests do not activate or cannot be completed due to taking actions on the galaxy map or scanning planets.

ME1 enemies become invisible but still shoot at you non-existent.

ME3 both in the SP and MP parts of the game enemies become invisible and still shoot at you but you cannot kill them is a major problem.

ME1 dialogue impossible if you don't have a certain member on your team non-existent.

ME3 dialogue situations impossible if Ashley died on Virmire and you only have Kaiden is a bug.

ME1 squad mates getting stuck, non-existent

ME3 squat mates get stuck and cannot follow you

ME1 squad powers greyed out and not able to use no matter what non-existent

ME3 squad powers greyed out and cannot be used no matter what, or cannot be used for minutes on end though the power was never fired and no other powers were used.

ME1 achievement progress reset non-existent

ME3 achievement progress resetting constantly for many people

ME1 journal always updated your quest after you hit a quest marker

ME3 journal doesn't update at all if you talk to person A then go and talk to person B and hit a quest marker.

ME1 quest journal doesn't start you down near the bottom or half way down the journal of quests forcing you to scroll back to the top to see all the active quests.

ME3 quest journal forces you to do what was stated above.

ME1 endings made sense.

ME3 ending made no sense and did not fit the game at all or the trilogy.

ME1 combat powers had a long cool down time, but you could use more than one power at a time.

ME3 combat powers have shorter cool down time but you can only use one power at a time.

ME1 combat weapons could use up to 3 mods

ME3 combat, weapons can only use 2 mods

ME1 combat you could take all weapons into battle without worrying about power cool down and could still fire off powers one at a time without a global cool down system.

ME3 combat the power system was ret conned and now a weight system has been added and you can no longer bring in any weapon you want without severe power cool down problems and unable to fire off other powers with the global cool down system.

ME1 combat some coverage but not much, could have been better.

ME3 lots of coverage, better than ME1

ME1 squad AI control did not function all that well on any system.

ME3 squad AI is supposed to be better but does not function all that well as orders are not carried out when ordered to do so via the use of a hand held controller on a console system.

I have compiled a list of bugs for ME1 and ME3 here and it's quite clear that ME1 was the better game and was not rushed. Fact is the facts are on my side.

I have just posted each and every fact and the facts are on the side that ME1 was the better game.

[txgoldrush]

MrHibachi wrote...

txgoldrush wrote...

And yet Bioware is trying new things for ME3 like autodialogue and its attacked, but when ME1 tried new things and didn't come out right...thats excused......that is hypocrisy.

I don't see that as an example of hypocrisy at all.  You relate something specific that relates directly to the kind of game it is to a broad generalization about change and trying new "things".   Plus it would only be hypocritical if it were coming from the exact same people in the first place.  I think there is a fundamental problem in games trying to switch or split genres in the midst of a pre-planned trilogy when the first two installments follow the same pattern and the third starts to split away and do something else.  Minimizing core elements of an RPG to make it more palatable to shooter/action gamers is a pretty asinine thing to do imo.

and yet if the core RPG elements HURT the story or the dialogue, they should be removed.

Notice how Shepard has BETTER more fleshed out dialogue now in ME3 than in the first two games, which makes the conversations flow more natural....or that the new and improved take on Renegade leads to the character not having major tone swings if you alternate Paragon and Renegade. Nevermind the fact that you aren't even penalized anymore for playing a nuetral character unlike ME1 and ME2.

RPG elitists do not understand tradeoffs....yes you lose inetractivity and customization, but you gain better writing, better voice acting, and better conversations.

[MrHibachi]

There was far more character depth and interaction in ME1 than in 3. That stuck out like a sore thumb. I admit though that I never did a real dedicated renegade playthrough (though I did try) so I can't really speak to that specific comparison.

[FellishBeast]

/strongly disagree with OP.

I agree with Joolazoo!

[txgoldrush]

Heather Cline wrote...

Ok you want facts. Fine I will list the facts for ME1 and then for ME3. Lets see how they stack up.

ME1 texture popping issues due to it being on a new system with a new version of the unreal engine.

ME3 texture popping issues due to being rushed and the game not being optimized.

ME1 Menu system belonging due to it being an RPG.

ME3 lack of menu system due to minority of fans raging about it and getting it changed while many said nothing.

ME1 items to give you choices on what to equip and use and able to use up to 3 mods per gun with higher level equipment.

ME3 lack of items and mods to use and also limiting you to 2 mods per gun.

ME1 load times are negligent and absent.

ME3 load times are horrible especially in the armor screen.

ME1 game freezing non-existent.

ME3 game freezes constantly.

ME1 graphical glitches non-existent.

ME3 graphical glitches including glowing mouths, assault rifle butt going into femsheps chest when being held, or going into garrus' armor when he holds it.

ME1 Hand texture issues non-existent

ME3 hand texture issues with NPC's and Shepard having old people hands when the characters are in their 20's and 30's

ME1 mission bugs, very few and very minor that they did not need to be patched.

ME3 mission bugs abound in this game. There are many that are posted in the ME3 tech support forums for these.

ME1 femshep walks like a woman and runs like a woman

ME3 femshep walks partly like a man and runs like a man

ME1 lighting issues... non-existent. All lighting issues were dealt with in development.

ME3 lighting issues abound in Javik's room on the normandy, on the citadel and in missions.

ME1 cutscenes where using a assault rifle is taken off the back an actual assault rifle is taken off the back.

ME3 if your shepard is not equipped with an assault rifle the character still reaches behind their back for an assault rifle but comes up with a sub machine gun.

ME1 start up sequence... when the game starts there is no black screen with white snow across it.

ME3 start up sequence... when the game starts up many times there is a black screen with white snow across it before the game starts up.

ME1 black screen start up freezing non-existent.

ME3 black screen start up freezing is constant and many people are affected by this.

ME1 dialogue not executing right non-existent

ME3 dialogue cues not executing right existent in several places.

ME1 auto-dialogue is minimal in the RPG mode and the same goes for ME2.

ME3 auto-dialogue is rampant in both Story and RPG mode.

ME1 crazy head animations non-existent

ME3 crazy head animations existent and noted in several places throughout the game.

ME1 dialogue audio cutting out non-existent.

ME3 dialogue audio cutting out is not only present it runs rampant throughout the entire game.

ME1 side quests having huge bugs where quests do not activate or cannot be completed if certain actions are taken elsewhere non-existent

ME3 side quests do not activate or cannot be completed due to taking actions on the galaxy map or scanning planets.

ME1 enemies become invisible but still shoot at you non-existent.

ME3 both in the SP and MP parts of the game enemies become invisible and still shoot at you but you cannot kill them is a major problem.

ME1 dialogue impossible if you don't have a certain member on your team non-existent.

ME3 dialogue situations impossible if Ashley died on Virmire and you only have Kaiden is a bug.

ME1 squad mates getting stuck, non-existent

ME3 squat mates get stuck and cannot follow you

ME1 squad powers greyed out and not able to use no matter what non-existent

ME3 squad powers greyed out and cannot be used no matter what, or cannot be used for minutes on end though the power was never fired and no other powers were used.

ME1 achievement progress reset non-existent

ME3 achievement progress resetting constantly for many people

ME1 journal always updated your quest after you hit a quest marker

ME3 journal doesn't update at all if you talk to person A then go and talk to person B and hit a quest marker.

ME1 quest journal doesn't start you down near the bottom or half way down the journal of quests forcing you to scroll back to the top to see all the active quests.

ME3 quest journal forces you to do what was stated above.

ME1 endings made sense.

ME3 ending made no sense and did not fit the game at all or the trilogy.

ME1 combat powers had a long cool down time, but you could use more than one power at a time.

ME3 combat powers have shorter cool down time but you can only use one power at a time.

ME1 combat weapons could use up to 3 mods

ME3 combat, weapons can only use 2 mods

ME1 combat you could take all weapons into battle without worrying about power cool down and could still fire off powers one at a time without a global cool down system.

ME3 combat the power system was ret conned and now a weight system has been added and you can no longer bring in any weapon you want without severe power cool down problems and unable to fire off other powers with the global cool down system.

ME1 combat some coverage but not much, could have been better.

ME3 lots of coverage, better than ME1

ME1 squad AI control did not function all that well on any system.

ME3 squad AI is supposed to be better but does not function all that well as orders are not carried out when ordered to do so via the use of a hand held controller on a console system.

I have compiled a list of bugs for ME1 and ME3 here and it's quite clear that ME1 was the better game and was not rushed. Fact is the facts are on my side.

I have just posted each and every fact and the facts are on the side that ME1 was the better game.

and yet once again you are excusing flaws of ME1...its a new system, so the texture pop in is okay...bla bla bla....better developers can use a new system and not show texture pop in.

And I had plenty of bugs with ME1....such as Mako getting stuck and freezes.

[MrHibachi]

txgoldrush wrote...

MrHibachi wrote...

txgoldrush wrote...

And yet Bioware is trying new things for ME3 like autodialogue and its attacked, but when ME1 tried new things and didn't come out right...thats excused......that is hypocrisy.

I don't see that as an example of hypocrisy at all.  You relate something specific that relates directly to the kind of game it is to a broad generalization about change and trying new "things".   Plus it would only be hypocritical if it were coming from the exact same people in the first place.  I think there is a fundamental problem in games trying to switch or split genres in the midst of a pre-planned trilogy when the first two installments follow the same pattern and the third starts to split away and do something else.  Minimizing core elements of an RPG to make it more palatable to shooter/action gamers is a pretty asinine thing to do imo.

and yet if the core RPG elements HURT the story or the dialogue, they should be removed.

Notice how Shepard has BETTER more fleshed out dialogue now in ME3 than in the first two games, which makes the conversations flow more natural....or that the new and improved take on Renegade leads to the character not having major tone swings if you alternate Paragon and Renegade. Nevermind the fact that you aren't even penalized anymore for playing a nuetral character unlike ME1 and ME2.

RPG elitists do not understand tradeoffs....yes you lose inetractivity and customization, but you gain better writing, better voice acting, and better conversations.

Actually I mainly play strategy games by far, but I do recognize the stupidity of a game that falls squarely into a genre suddenly trying to make more money by attempting to become a something for everyone misfit genre.  ME3 seemed like a definite step in that direction.  Im not really sure what youre trying to argue here.  You're saying that ME1 was inferior because it had more depth of dialogue and that trimming all of it out and having non-interactable sentence strings with no wheel and a few one liners by Shepard was an improvement as the new MO for conversations between missions?

[AwesomeDudex64]

Gameplay is meh but the lore man.. THE LORE.